If You Could Vote Again (Brexit)

OUT OF HOURS BULLY'S TRUCKSTOP BAR (INTERACTIVE)
201

Winseer:
The difficulty for any government making a serious attempt to implement Brexit - is that with only a 52% mandate - you’re going to have to get them ALL on board, or any watered-down effort, even watered down say, 10% - is going to take you below that 50% support line, and presumably the Remainers will jump at the chance to play yet another “Let’s forget the whole damned thing” card. :frowning:

We need a government who takes control of our own civil services now - to get Brexit back on track.

…Or we’ll hit the end of March next year - and get told just as they financial year ends “Let’s forget the whole thing” ANYWAY. :angry:

That’s always been the plan from the date of the referendum and remainer Cameron being replaced by remainer May.As for the 52% it wouldn’t make any difference if it was 92% because the remainers being ideologically Federalists don’t recognise the seperate rights or wishes within any one seperate state only the majority vote of the Union as a whole.Just as many American Federalists think that no state can secede from the Union unless it’s agreed by the majority of the states that make up the Union.What is certain is that we’re not alone in this issue.

texianpartisan.com/daniel-mille … -business/

texianpartisan.com/tnms-daniel- … -new-book/

202

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?
Irish border?

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

203

Franglais:
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?
Irish border?

Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t the Irish border be exactly the same border that it was up to 1972 without any problem.With any hard border seperation and filtering if needed done at the mainland ports and airports as it is now in the case of domestic flights passenger or freight v international.Or UK residents v EU v non EU ones ?.Remainers and their EU masters are just trying to use it as a red herring to derail Brexit.

As Winseer said the first act should have been to stop our rip off EU payments with immediate effect which would remove the incentive for Tusk etc to keep us in.

204

Carryfast:

Franglais:
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?
Irish border?

Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t the Irish border be exactly the same border that it was up to 1972 without any problem.

Good grief, “without any problem” you say? :laughing:

With any hard border seperation and filtering if needed done at the mainland ports and airports as it is now in the case of domestic flights passenger or freight v international.

The problem is that Northern Ireland has more border crossings than the Eastern frontier of the EU, and the nationalists simply won’t stand for any physical infrastructure or border checking system on the island of Ireland (and nobody in Norther Ireland wants that scar torn open again).

Or UK residents v EU v non EU ones ?.Remainers and their EU masters are just trying to use it as a red herring to derail Brexit.

It’s not simply control of people, it’s also control of goods, and obviously the unionists will not tolerate a border in the Irish Sea (i.e. customs controls), the nationalists and the Southern Irish won’t tolerate a land border, and the EU will not tolerate at the external frontier the total absence of any border.

As Winseer said the first act should have been to stop our rip off EU payments with immediate effect which would remove the incentive for Tusk etc to keep us in.

All that would attract is sanctions and a diplomatic catastrophe.

205

Franglais:
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?
Irish border?

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

The problem with “Nothing is agreed, until everything is agreed” - is that we keep on paying Brussels in the meantime.

This means if it never happens - then Brexit never happens. It’s a fait acompli, just simply by doing nothing at all, forever.

May won’t give a ■■■■ that her master plan to block Brexit will destroy the Conservative Party and send it the way of the Whigs, and more recently the Libdems.

If the wider Party waits until May steps down (likely Autumn 2021) then they’ll barely have 6-9 months to get ready to win the next election that surely cannot be won, quite simply because Brexit still won’t be beyond the point of no return - let along outright DONE by that point.

At present, we’re being led to believe that Brexit - that could have been done arbitrarily on the day of the Referendum result - is now going to happen at the end of March 2019.

There is a danger we’ll get there - and it’ll be kicked down the road for this “transition period” - ALSO totally unnecessarily.

Then there’s the following election, which I’m pretty damned sure TM won’t be hanging around for.

She’ll be on that only lifeboat off the sinking Titanic of the Conservative Party - whilst Mogg, Davis, Gove, and others - re-arrange the deckchairs, and strike up the band to start playing “Autumn” - an appropriate tune, for the timing of May’s departure. :unamused: She gets a full ex-PMs pension for having served a full five years as PM. The Conservative Party will be lucky to retain a rump of seats in the 2022 election. With the Libdems currently on 12, UKIP on 0 and already unrecoverably wrecked by Farage’s departure as leader - the only thing that could stop McCluskey’s erm I mean Corbyn’s Hard Lefter Party taking power, even if by a single seat largest number of seats amount - is flooding out Westminster with a load of newly minted INDEPENDENT MPs, who have no assigned Party to push them about. Get 60+ seats though, and a loose co-operative can instantly be formed, to take part in any “support, supply, and even Coalition” negotiations. All it would take would be a bit of Unity among an otherwise loose group…

I’m a bit worried meanwhile, that with all these former power plants being demolished around my neck of the woods - that by 2021 - we’ll be totally dependent on EU-supplied electricity. They could literally switch us off, if we don’t bend the knee - once that mythical 11th hour before Brexit comes upon us. :frowning:

206

Rjan:

Carryfast:

Franglais:
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed?
Irish border?

Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t the Irish border be exactly the same border that it was up to 1972 without any problem.

Good grief, “without any problem” you say? :laughing:

With any hard border seperation and filtering if needed done at the mainland ports and airports as it is now in the case of domestic flights passenger or freight v international.

The problem is that Northern Ireland has more border crossings than the Eastern frontier of the EU, and the nationalists simply won’t stand for any physical infrastructure or border checking system on the island of Ireland (and nobody in Norther Ireland wants that scar torn open again).

Or UK residents v EU v non EU ones ?.Remainers and their EU masters are just trying to use it as a red herring to derail Brexit.

It’s not simply control of people, it’s also control of goods, and obviously the unionists will not tolerate a border in the Irish Sea (i.e. customs controls), the nationalists and the Southern Irish won’t tolerate a land border, and the EU will not tolerate at the external frontier the total absence of any border.

As Winseer said the first act should have been to stop our rip off EU payments with immediate effect which would remove the incentive for Tusk etc to keep us in.

All that would attract is sanctions and a diplomatic catastrophe.

Sactions from that point - would be an act of war. Those people who say “Corbyn is unelectable, because he would be incapable of going to war” - need to make up their minds just what such power “being able and/or prepared to go to war” actually IS in politics.! Diplomatic Catastrophe?

The Remainers should be rejoicing that on the day of actual Brexit - the UK MEPs, of which UKIP have the most at this time - will all be sacked on the day the money stops flowing to Brussels.
That Farage still draws his pay - is the EU’s “Byzantine” fault then, and the Remainers themselves - for failing to “Hurry Up” Tusk, et al from “getting on with it” so they can just see Farage get the boot he said he was up for on the day after the referendum.

If the UK could make peace with America after losing the War of Independence - then I’m sure the EU would much rather make peace with Brexit-Achieved Britain in the same manner.

There’s no reason why we cannot return to a hard border in NI. If we had it before - we can have it again. What’s going to happen? The IRA threaten us with a renewed Terror campaign? REALLY?

We don’t need Customs Union. Once we’ve left, the EU will likely want a better relationship via WTO, otherwise being shut out in the cold from the biggest re-mix of international trade since WWIII.

Access to the single market, whilst being at the EU’s timing - would be hurried up by the fact the EU make money on that trade as it is, whereas the UK loses money. If we stop then Britain gains and EU loses for each day wasted doing nothing after that stoppage of former single market relationship. Goods in transit will still be paid for. Setting up and renewing future contracts - will not be so easy though. That, once again - is more harmful to the EU’s trade than it is to the UKs, who can be well on the way to forging new trade routes with any nation on Earth we see increasingly lining up to do such trade. :bulb:

207

Rjan:

Carryfast:
Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t the Irish border be exactly the same border that it was up to 1972 without any problem.

Good grief, “without any problem” you say? :laughing:

With any hard border seperation and filtering if needed done at the mainland ports and airports as it is now in the case of domestic flights passenger or freight v international.

The problem is that Northern Ireland has more border crossings than the Eastern frontier of the EU, and the nationalists simply won’t stand for any physical infrastructure or border checking system on the island of Ireland (and nobody in Norther Ireland wants that scar torn open again).

Or UK residents v EU v non EU ones ?.Remainers and their EU masters are just trying to use it as a red herring to derail Brexit.

It’s not simply control of people, it’s also control of goods, and obviously the unionists will not tolerate a border in the Irish Sea (i.e. customs controls), the nationalists and the Southern Irish won’t tolerate a land border, and the EU will not tolerate at the external frontier the total absence of any border.

As Winseer said the first act should have been to stop our rip off EU payments with immediate effect which would remove the incentive for Tusk etc to keep us in.

All that would attract is sanctions and a diplomatic catastrophe.

Yes without any problem.You know the same border seperating two different sovereign countries which Nationalists like Michael Collins died fighting for and which,combined with the CTA agreement,worked fine until 1972 at least.

What border ‘in the Irish Sea’.The fact is there is no actual border crossing in the sea around UK anywhere whether entering the country from New York or Calais or Ireland North or South. :unamused: The usual formalities apply in that people or freight don’t actually formally enter the country until they’ve crossed the customs points from either air side or dock side and that’s where any necessary border formalities would be carried out.It doesn’t take place at sea.Just as when landing at Heathrow from Belfast means crossing an international frontier by default from air side to the terminal exit and only then recognised as a UK citizen.IE are you saying that a US citizen,flying from JFK to Shannon,then Belfast to Heathrow,wouldn’t face different border checks on landing at Heathrow v their Northern or even Southern Irish counterpart ?.So why the big issue in the case of the similar type of frontier crossing at Cairnryan.While non UK/CTA passengers don’t generally,if ever,enter the UK via Ireland anyway.But you and Starmer already knew all that.

As for your obvious support of the imposition of EU ‘sanctions’,for us stopping payments to the EU,like the non existent border issue,that’s another example of remainers trying to create obstacles where none exist and working against the interests of their own country because they don’t believe in the idea of this country as a sovereign nation state.Their loyalty is to the EU and the EU leadership.Let alone then trying to infiltrate the Leave process by pretending that they are Leavers.So tell us what ‘sanctions’ are they going to impose on us that we can’t retaliate against to better effect ?.While it’s obvious that nothing would change in your view of wanting to hand over our cash to the EU,at the expense of the NHS etc,even ‘after’ Corbyn’s version of so called ‘Brexit’.Which means remain in all but name and which explains why he’s put Starmer in the job of shadow Brexit minister not Hoey.

208

Failing to reach agreement on the Irish border wouldn’t STOP Brexit would it? It does mean though that it’d be a “crash out” rather than an orderly exit with favourable trade deals in place.
I’m sure that some would see that as a price worth paying. I certainly don’t. (No surprise there!)

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

209

Franglais:
Failing to reach agreement on the Irish border wouldn’t STOP Brexit would it? It does mean though that it’d be a “crash out” rather than an orderly exit with favourable trade deals in place.
I’m sure that some would see that as a price worth paying. I certainly don’t. (No surprise there!)

I’ve already explained that there is no issue over the Irish ‘border’ because that was all sorted by the early 1920’s with numerous advantageous amendments since.With all inter Irish-UK relations still applying as to those agreements.The only difference would be that ‘EU’ entries to the UK via Ireland would now be viewed as just as foreign as US ones assuming that we ditch the single market.In the real world such entries not existing anyway.

Define ‘favourable’ trade deals ?.Bearing in mind the present situation of us exchanging sovereignty and cash for the privilege of being a net importer of EU products ( especially German products ).

210

Franglais:
Failing to reach agreement on the Irish border wouldn’t STOP Brexit would it? It does mean though that it’d be a “crash out” rather than an orderly exit with favourable trade deals in place.
I’m sure that some would see that as a price worth paying. I certainly don’t. (No surprise there!)

The most natural solution, if the UK is not going to have a customs union with the EU, would be “special status” as demanded by Sinn Fein, but it is still tantamount to a border in the Irish Sea, about which the unionists would be quite rightly outraged and it basically amounts to the UK having an internal border.

The bottom line I think is that the idea won’t fly. There are simply no trade deals available that justify the upset. If there was even the faintest hope of a trade deal to replace the EU, the potential would be getting trumpeted already.

The Brexiteers may as well accept that, whatever form Brexit takes, it won’t be one that involves the absence of a customs union with the EU, and it definitely won’t be one that involves any lessening of basic standards set by the EU.

We simply have to live within our own means, and accept that improvements for ordinary people will come from better economic management and a fairer distribution of the wealth we have (in favour of workers and earners), not from some sort of international free trade coup.

The NHS is not going to be rescued by free trade fantasies - it will be rescued by wringing out all the extra market bureaucracy introduced since 1979 and by people paying a fraction of extra tax to fund it properly. It’s that simple.

If the Labour government does something serious about housing, most earners will feel substantially better off simply because their rents and mortgage debts will fall. Even if you’re a homeowner already and won’t benefit directly, it will still mean your kids paying lower rents, both at university and when they start their own families.

And once these unearned incomes for landlords and banks are cleaned off (remember it is the bank that collects most of the profit from inflated property prices), which claims a third or more of some people’s earned incomes, the idea of expecting them to pay an extra 1 or 2% in tax for decent public services and properly maintained roads will seem like a heavenly deal.

So too, getting idle rentiers out to work and producing, instead of letting them mostly sit back and collect unearned incomes, will improve the amount of skilled labour available to the economy and make it clear that the British economy is for earners not for wealthy idlers.

Forcing capital out of housing speculation will also reduce the cost of capital and allow further economic investment in productivity to be made much more cheaply.

A dose of moderately higher inflation, so long as wages are supported to increase in step, will also do a great deal of good in diminishing the value of existing debts and overpriced assets gradually and allowing the debt market to return to much tighter control (rather than forcing a sudden write-off).

211

Carryfast:
Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t the Irish border be exactly the same border that it was up to 1972 without any problem.With any hard border seperation and filtering if needed done at the mainland ports and airports as it is now in the case of domestic flights passenger or freight v international.Or UK residents v EU v non EU ones ?.Remainers and their EU masters are just trying to use it as a red herring to derail Brexit.

From the 1920s there has been pretty much free movement of people between the Republic of Eire and the UK. Back then Eire wasnt in the EU of course.
Now due to Eire being, and remaining members of the EU there is free movement of people between all EU countries and Eire.
So without a border between Eire and Northern Ireland there will be no frontier controls between EU and the UK. That is equally true for goods.

The EU and Eire will have no border between them, that`s the point of Eire being in the EU: free movement and trade.
After Brexit it seems we want to restrict movement of people, (and tax goods differently etc).
So we need a border between us and the EU including Eire.
Equally the EU will want a border between UK and EU. A porous border will allow flow both ways of course, and business and individuals will exploit any holes.

So can we have a border between N.I. and Eire?
With trade and people crossing for decades, there hasnt been an effective border there for years. It could increase Republican anger, but without considering that, itd be a massive burden on local farmers, traders and workers. The time and money involved would throw a massive rock under the wheels of trade there.

The DUP (which props up the current Gov) says NO, to a border between N.I.and the mainland. It would effectively mean that N.I. would be in the EU with Eire, and be separate to the UK. A United Eire and a split UK. A lot of others would say no too.
So we need a border somewhere if we are to be truly outside the EU.

It must be between UK and EU.
It cant be between N.I. and UK. It cant be between Eire and N.I.
It can`t be between Eire and EU.
So, it is a problem…

212

Franglais:

Carryfast:
Why wouldn’t/shouldn’t the Irish border be exactly the same border that it was up to 1972 without any problem.With any hard border seperation and filtering if needed done at the mainland ports and airports as it is now in the case of domestic flights passenger or freight v international.Or UK residents v EU v non EU ones ?.Remainers and their EU masters are just trying to use it as a red herring to derail Brexit.

From the 1920s there has been pretty much free movement of people between the Republic of Eire and the UK. Back then Eire wasnt in the EU of course.
Now due to Eire being, and remaining members of the EU there is free movement of people between all EU countries and Eire.
So without a border between Eire and Northern Ireland there will be no frontier controls between EU and the UK. That is equally true for goods.

The EU and Eire will have no border between them, that`s the point of Eire being in the EU: free movement and trade.
After Brexit it seems we want to restrict movement of people, (and tax goods differently etc).
So we need a border between us and the EU including Eire.
Equally the EU will want a border between UK and EU. A porous border will allow flow both ways of course, and business and individuals will exploit any holes.

So can we have a border between N.I. and Eire?
With trade and people crossing for decades, there hasnt been an effective border there for years. It could increase Republican anger, but without considering that, itd be a massive burden on local farmers, traders and workers. The time and money involved would throw a massive rock under the wheels of trade there.

The DUP (which props up the current Gov) says NO, to a border between N.I.and the mainland. It would effectively mean that N.I. would be in the EU with Eire, and be separate to the UK. A United Eire and a split UK. A lot of others would say no too.
So we need a border somewhere if we are to be truly outside the EU.

It must be between UK and EU.
It cant be between N.I. and UK. It cant be between Eire and N.I.
It can`t be between Eire and EU.
So, it is a problem…

There has never been ‘free movement of ‘people’ between UK and Eire’.There has been free movement between all of Ireland and UK according to the CTA protocols.As I said there is a border between UK and everywhere else in the world,including Northern Ireland,every time that someone steps off of an aircraft at Heathrow airport or enters the country through Dover for example.It’s only at ‘that point’ that their respective border crossing status is determined.

So I’ll ask again assuming that a US citizen or freight enters Ireland at Shannon and then crosses the Irish border to Belfast and then flies on to Heathrow what border crossing and customs points apply in that case ?.Is it the Irish border or the air side v terminal/customs sheds at Heathrow ?.Assuming it’s air side v immigration/customs control at Heathrow what changes in the case of EU origin ( as opposed to Irish origin ) becoming subject to the same status as US origin ?.Here’s a clue nothing.The relevant immigration/import status is determined on the UK mainland not at the Irish border crossing in all cases.

213

Carryfast:
There has never been ‘free movement of ‘people’ between UK and Eire’.

Eh ?

214

Carryfast:

Franglais:
Failing to reach agreement on the Irish border wouldn’t STOP Brexit would it? It does mean though that it’d be a “crash out” rather than an orderly exit with favourable trade deals in place.
I’m sure that some would see that as a price worth paying. I certainly don’t. (No surprise there!)

I’ve already explained that there is no issue over the Irish ‘border’ because that was all sorted by the early 1920’s with numerous advantageous amendments since.With all inter Irish-UK relations still applying as to those agreements.The only difference would be that ‘EU’ entries to the UK via Ireland would now be viewed as just as foreign as US ones assuming that we ditch the single market.In the real world such entries not existing anyway.

Define ‘favourable’ trade deals ?.Bearing in mind the present situation of us exchanging sovereignty and cash for the privilege of being a net importer of EU products ( especially German products ).

Favorable trade deals? The ones were trying to negotiate at the moment. You know, we ones we can cut as outside the EU? Or are you as sceptical about these two birds in the bush as I am?? And if we had a less favorable deal with the EU, why wouldnt any company export their goods (freely) from the EU into Eire, no border, then into the UK??
This the whole point of the problem…
If there can`t be hard border between the places I listed before there will be no border between the UK and the EU.

Before youve said youd like a tax on Merc cars?
They must be tax free from Germany into Eire.
You say no border in Ulster, so they will go freely from Dublin to Belfast, and so freely from Belfast to London…
And the same for Hans, Pierre, or Ivan or whoever.

Trade from the US?
Assume we get a deal to buy food cheaper from the US than from the EU? The EU may have higher import duties on US foods than we have, due to us exporting Jags cheaper than the EU exports Mercs?? Thats one of the aims isnt it ?
So, cheap food into Liverpool, free movement into Belfast, then into Dublin, then into the EU…
Where will YOU put the border?
And if you say "Great well turn a profit on the trade". We in the UK put a big tax on Mercs coming into the UK to support our car makers....you know whats coming don`t you?..
Mercs into Dublin (EU free trade) so to Belfast (the 1972 border) so to the UK… Mercs in London evading all duties.

I cant see how itll work.
And so far no one else can either.

215

Rjan:
The most natural solution, if the UK is not going to have a customs union with the EU, would be “special status” as demanded by Sinn Fein, but it is still tantamount to a border in the Irish Sea, about which the unionists would be quite rightly outraged and it basically amounts to the UK having an internal border.

The bottom line I think is that the idea won’t fly. There are simply no trade deals available that justify the upset. If there was even the faintest hope of a trade deal to replace the EU, the potential would be getting trumpeted already.

The Brexiteers may as well accept that, whatever form Brexit takes, it won’t be one that involves the absence of a customs union with the EU, and it definitely won’t be one that involves any lessening of basic standards set by the EU.

We simply have to live within our own means, and accept that improvements for ordinary people will come from better economic management and a fairer distribution of the wealth we have (in favour of workers and earners), not from some sort of international free trade coup.

The NHS is not going to be rescued by free trade fantasies - it will be rescued by wringing out all the extra market bureaucracy introduced since 1979 and by people paying a fraction of extra tax to fund it properly. It’s that simple.

If the Labour government does something serious about housing, most earners will feel substantially better off simply because their rents and mortgage debts will fall. Even if you’re a homeowner already and won’t benefit directly, it will still mean your kids paying lower rents, both at university and when they start their own families.

And once these unearned incomes for landlords and banks are cleaned off (remember it is the bank that collects most of the profit from inflated property prices), which claims a third or more of some people’s earned incomes, the idea of expecting them to pay an extra 1 or 2% in tax for decent public services and properly maintained roads will seem like a heavenly deal.

So too, getting idle rentiers out to work and producing, instead of letting them mostly sit back and collect unearned incomes, will improve the amount of skilled labour available to the economy and make it clear that the British economy is for earners not for wealthy idlers.

Forcing capital out of housing speculation will also reduce the cost of capital and allow further economic investment in productivity to be made much more cheaply.

A dose of moderately higher inflation, so long as wages are supported to increase in step, will also do a great deal of good in diminishing the value of existing debts and overpriced assets gradually and allowing the debt market to return to much tighter control (rather than forcing a sudden write-off).

Yep, a lot of sense there.
But too many “invested interests” for it to happen. Unfortunately.
And too many have already bought into the mythical dreams held out to them. To look afresh now be admitting to having been duped already. (Maybe that applies equally to ALL parties?)
There is another problem we havent really explored yet, as we sit here pontificating and righting the worlds wrongs, and thats the way we are becoming more polarized as time goes on. We all on TNUK are balanced individuals who engage in reasoned argument, and readily see each others point of view, but everyone aint like us! Honest, but its true.
Some, nay many, are getting more and more set in their ways as they argue to support decisions they made previously, and will not countenance any fault on their own part.

216

Mike-C:

Carryfast:
There has never been ‘free movement of ‘people’ between UK and Eire’.

Eh ?

Free movement subject to CTA status and obviously as part of EU membership EU status,being established.

Not free movement of Americans ( or Mexicans :smiling_imp: ) or,hopefully,after Brexit,‘Europeans’ and all subject to their respective relevant status being determined on landing in the UK mainland.Not necessarily when crossing the Irish border. :wink:

217

Franglais:

Carryfast:
I’ve already explained that there is no issue over the Irish ‘border’ because that was all sorted by the early 1920’s with numerous advantageous amendments since.With all inter Irish-UK relations still applying as to those agreements.The only difference would be that ‘EU’ entries to the UK via Ireland would now be viewed as just as foreign as US ones assuming that we ditch the single market.In the real world such entries not existing anyway.

Define ‘favourable’ trade deals ?.Bearing in mind the present situation of us exchanging sovereignty and cash for the privilege of being a net importer of EU products ( especially German products ).

Favorable trade deals? The ones were trying to negotiate at the moment. You know, we ones we can cut as outside the EU? Or are you as sceptical about these two birds in the bush as I am?? And if we had a less favorable deal with the EU, why wouldnt any company export their goods (freely) from the EU into Eire, no border, then into the UK??
This the whole point of the problem…
If there can`t be hard border between the places I listed before there will be no border between the UK and the EU.

Before youve said youd like a tax on Merc cars?
They must be tax free from Germany into Eire.
You say no border in Ulster, so they will go freely from Dublin to Belfast, and so freely from Belfast to London…
And the same for Hans, Pierre, or Ivan or whoever.

Trade from the US?
Assume we get a deal to buy food cheaper from the US than from the EU? The EU may have higher import duties on US foods than we have, due to us exporting Jags cheaper than the EU exports Mercs?? Thats one of the aims isnt it ?
So, cheap food into Liverpool, free movement into Belfast, then into Dublin, then into the EU…
Where will YOU put the border?
And if you say "Great well turn a profit on the trade". We in the UK put a big tax on Mercs coming into the UK to support our car makers....you know whats coming don`t you?..
Mercs into Dublin (EU free trade) so to Belfast (the 1972 border) so to the UK… Mercs in London evading all duties.

I cant see how itll work.
And so far no one else can either.

You didn’t answer the US immigration/import example.IE we’ve already got the situation of foreign people and goods being subject to UK immigration and customs even if they enter via Southern Ireland with no hard border required between Southern and Northern Ireland.

As for Northern Irish not accepting a so called ‘hard’ border between UK and Northern Ireland as I said we’ve already got one every time they step off of an aircraft at Heathrow from Belfast or a ferry when landing at Cairnryan. :unamused:

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s … d-16729902

As I said the whole issue is a red herring being invented by remainers ( including among the DUP ) as a non existent obstacle to keep us tied to their Federal European dreams.As for can’t see how it will work it will work in exactly the same way that it ‘worked’ before 1973.More like don’t want to see how it will work.

218

Franglais:
[…]

It must be between UK and EU.
It cant be between N.I. and UK. It cant be between Eire and N.I.
It can`t be between Eire and EU.
So, it is a problem…

It’s a good summary - 4 political players, one border, no way out.

I really think the solution will lay closer to home, in Brexiteers clarifying for themselves what they really want and waking up to some hard realities, rather than subscribing to an shopping list of fantasies, vague grievances, an argumentative gambits that don’t coalesce into a political programme.

As Tusk drearily stated several months ago, the Tories have been seeking an agreement whose nature is simply not remotely in the interests of the rest of the members, and they’re not having it. The wolf has huffed and puffed but the little pigs are secure inside a block-built house.

Since that is the case, do the Brexiteers now want to continue trading cooperatively with Europe, or compete with its export market via the low road (i.e. more attacks on workers’ job security and living standards)? Do they merely want to leave the EU, or destroy it?

Do they want total ongoing democratic control over trade and economics, meaning an end to all free trade with markets beyond our borders? Or do they want to seek new free trade deals elsewhere, which will involve our democratic hands being tied whilst the deal is in force (just like we currently have with the EU)? Are they willing to work with judges in foreign countries in applying a set of common laws to these deals, or do they want total law-making and judging power?

On immigration also, what do Brexiteers want? Is it an end to further EU migration? What is their attitude to citizens who have already settled? Is it an end to non-EU migration from the rest of the world? Is it an end to refugees and asylum seekers? Is it an end to grooming gangs, some of whom are ethnically Asian but are actually British-born and not migrants?

When Brexiteers can settle on a coherent agenda, we will finally be moving along.

219

Franglais:

Rjan:
[…]

Yep, a lot of sense there.
But too many “invested interests” for it to happen. Unfortunately.
And too many have already bought into the mythical dreams held out to them. To look afresh now be admitting to having been duped already. (Maybe that applies equally to ALL parties?)
There is another problem we havent really explored yet, as we sit here pontificating and righting the worlds wrongs, and thats the way we are becoming more polarized as time goes on. We all on TNUK are balanced individuals who engage in reasoned argument, and readily see each others point of view, but everyone aint like us! Honest, but its true.
Some, nay many, are getting more and more set in their ways as they argue to support decisions they made previously, and will not countenance any fault on their own part.

I’m not sure that I get the sense that positions are becoming hardened - if anything, that which used to be solid is now melting into air! The general sense I get in society is that left-wing ideas are back in fashion. Brexiteers are fixated on Brexit, but that’s mainly because they’ve decided they’ve had enough of the status quo, but haven’t decided what sort of change they want.

I’m not even convinced that vested interests are reigning. Most of the country is in a mood for change. Half the country that voted for Brexit are hardly conservatives, voting as they did for the biggest political upset in a generation. The Tory party itself is captured by right-wing radicals, but unlike 1979 the substance of their agenda is totally out of kilter with the majority (like the Blairites did in Labour, they’re coasting on brand allegiance). And a good chunk of those that voted Remain are otherwise left-wingers who totally diverge from the Blairite orthodoxy.

220

Rjan:

Franglais:
[…]

It must be between UK and EU.
It cant be between N.I. and UK. It cant be between Eire and N.I.
It can`t be between Eire and EU.
So, it is a problem…

It’s a good summary - 4 political players, one border, no way out.

I really think the solution will lay closer to home, in Brexiteers clarifying for themselves what they really want and waking up to some hard realities, rather than subscribing to an shopping list of fantasies, vague grievances, an argumentative gambits that don’t coalesce into a political programme.

As Tusk drearily stated several months ago, the Tories have been seeking an agreement whose nature is simply not remotely in the interests of the rest of the members, and they’re not having it. The wolf has huffed and puffed but the little pigs are secure inside a block-built house.

Since that is the case, do the Brexiteers now want to continue trading cooperatively with Europe, or compete with its export market via the low road (i.e. more attacks on workers’ job security and living standards)? Do they merely want to leave the EU, or destroy it?

Do they want total ongoing democratic control over trade and economics, meaning an end to all free trade with markets beyond our borders? Or do they want to seek new free trade deals elsewhere, which will involve our democratic hands being tied whilst the deal is in force (just like we currently have with the EU)? Are they willing to work with judges in foreign countries in applying a set of common laws to these deals, or do they want total law-making and judging power?

On immigration also, what do Brexiteers want? Is it an end to further EU migration? What is their attitude to citizens who have already settled? Is it an end to non-EU migration from the rest of the world? Is it an end to refugees and asylum seekers? Is it an end to grooming gangs, some of whom are ethnically Asian but are actually British-born and not migrants?

When Brexiteers can settle on a coherent agenda, we will finally be moving along.

No surprise that Corbyn’s supporters showing their true colours.

We’ve already got the UK border in place on the UK mainland.It’s just a question of who and how anyone is allowed through it with Northern Irish having UK status and Southern Irish having CTA status.EU status on entry being what changes not the border between Eire and Northern Ireland nor the status of Irish or Northern Irish entrants.IE travelling between Ireland and the UK mainland isn’t the same thing as travelling between the Isle of Wight and Portsmouth or Southampton or Lymington.Which is why we don’t have UK border staff working at the Isle of Wight ferry terminals but we do at Cairnryan.Regradless of how much the remainers try to sell the lie of no supposed border between UK and Northern Ireland.

You do know it was the ‘Brexiteers’ as you call them that won the referendum not the remainers.The way you lot go on anyone would think that it it was remain which won it.Let alone desperately trying to infiltrate the Leave side and failing laughably because your Socialist ideology will always be for remain and handing your country over to the interests of the EU as part of that.Not the ideologically Nationalist idea of secession.

It’s clear what Corbyn and Starmer want and that’s remain and anything which doesn’t meet that aim is unacceptable to them and their supporters.

While you know exactly what the Leave side want as laid out in the Leave manifesto and that is totally achievable outside of the EU’s rules.To which your only bs answer is that the Germans and your EU Federalist allies are going to want to kick off a trade war with us to stop us.Although to be fair at least you’ve made it clear as to the choice between voting UKIP v Labour in which you really are deluded if you think that any Leave voter is going to trust Corbyn and Starmer to deliver Brexit any more than your remainer allies May and Hammond will.So keep up the good work you’re making a great case for the resurgence of UKIP.